Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
Thanks Tree9Thanks

Thread: Record Temperature Streak Bears Anthropogenic Footprint

  1. #11
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,166
    Thanks
    7556

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Panzareta View Post
    If only you could learn to read.
    I did,
    I did.

    the data I used was from the UN report not exxon.

  2. #12
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,166
    Thanks
    7556

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    That link is over 20 years old.....but even then...

    From your own link:
    20. Projected anthropogenic CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use, deforestation and cement production are shown for some of the IPCC emission scenarios. The highest emission scenario - IS92e - assumes moderate population growth, high economic growth, high fossil fuel availability, and a phase out of nuclear power; and the lowest emission scenario - IS92c - assumes low population growth, low economic growth, and severe constraints on fossil fuel supplies.
    Understanding how CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere will change in the future requires carbon cycle models which model the relationship between emissions and atmospheric concentrations. The estimated CO2 concentration in the atmosphere for each emission scenario (calculated using the Bern model) is shown in the second figure. All scenarioes show increased concentrations that are well above pre-industrial levels by 2100 (75 to 220% higher).
    Climate induced environmental changes cannot be reversed quickly. Even if the anthropogenic emissions of CO2 are stabilized or reduced, the CO2 content in the atmosphere will still increase for some time.

    They support man made climate change, just like your link to Oak Ridge labs did several months ago....you are your own worst enemy....

    Projected changes in CO2 and climate
    Yes, and the data set I used was from Geologist in the IPCC.. OOPS you do know the Geology division collected HISTORICAL data and CO2 concentrations. OOPS.

    So your LIE that my data was from EXXON is still a lie,

    So why do you try to cover up your lie with another lie.

  3. #13
    Veteran Member Panzareta's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    28,974
    Thanks
    17332

    From
    On a happy trail
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    I did,
    I did.

    the data I used was from the UN report not exxon.
    The maybe it's your inability to comprehend the words you read. A UN report means nothing if you can't understand it.

  4. #14
    Veteran Member Panzareta's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    28,974
    Thanks
    17332

    From
    On a happy trail
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Yes, and the data set I used was from Geologist in the IPCC.. OOPS you do know the Geology division collected HISTORICAL data and CO2 concentrations. OOPS.

    So your LIE that my data was from EXXON is still a lie,

    So why do you try to cover up your lie with another lie.
    Where did he say it was from Exxon since he quoted your own article?

  5. #15
    Veteran Member Micro Machines Champion, Race Against Time Champion Tedminator's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21,772
    Thanks
    11713

    From
    South Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    Record Temperature Streak Bears
    Hah lol @ the cut off thread title. I thought it meant bears with stripes due to record temperatures.

  6. #16
    Veteran Member Dr Sampson Simpson's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    21,043
    Thanks
    11438

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    The study I linked to is the first study (that I know of) to specifically look at the statistical probability of having three record-breaking years (2014, 2015, 2016) in a row. EXTREMELY unlikely----only a 0.03% chance-----without human influences vis--vis greenhouse gases.

    Just so others reading are clear on this: that is NOT three percent; it is three-HUNDREDTHS of ONE percent.

  7. #17
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    35,802
    Thanks
    37888

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Yes, and the data set I used was from Geologist in the IPCC.. OOPS you do know the Geology division collected HISTORICAL data and CO2 concentrations. OOPS.

    So your LIE that my data was from EXXON is still a lie,

    So why do you try to cover up your lie with another lie.
    I asked what was your source? And you give me a link to 20 year old data, that still confirmed man made global warming...and you cant figure it out....SMH

  8. #18
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    7,354
    Thanks
    4439

    From
    Canada, West Coast

  9. #19
    Member tnbskts's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,374
    Thanks
    4390

    From
    British expat in USA
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    This is a natural warming period and it is the coolest major warming period in 400,000 years..

    The Warming periods come in REGULAR CYCLES and HAVE similar peaks.. (This is the coolest of the 5 in the last 400,000 years).

    This warming period is right on schedule.




    Ever hears of a sine Wave also note in the pasts warming periods, the WARMING PRECEEDED CO2 increase, just like this warming period


    notice the patter in the warming and cooling and this:




    MMGW hoax mongers have played you like a dime store kazoo..
    In repeating this in thread after thread, you've never managed to explain why you think it's significant that the current cycle is longer and cooler than previous ones.

    Of course most of the relevance is in data over the last 50 years or so, which your graphs don't cover (strange, that...). But still, the variations in the natural cycles aren't relevant to this discussion and you've never managed to come up with a convincing reason for claiming that they are.
    Last edited by tnbskts; 14th September 2017 at 02:17 AM.

  10. #20
    Veteran Member PACE's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    20,918
    Thanks
    17821

    From
    None of your business
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    Well, someone who thinks that a sawtooth function has any commonality with a sine wave needs some upgrading of math skills.

    And whoever made up those other charts don't want us to see the last 70 years of data since that's where all the results of man's influence is shown.
    Precisely.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ...So Will THIS Building Collapse Into Its Own Footprint?
    By grinder in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 403
    Last Post: 5th June 2016, 02:51 PM
  2. Earth Day concert leaves quite a footprint on National Mall
    By meridian5455 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 20th April 2015, 08:43 AM
  3. Replies: 169
    Last Post: 8th October 2014, 09:46 AM
  4. Replies: 144
    Last Post: 29th August 2012, 04:46 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23rd August 2007, 07:04 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed